I was taken to task recently by one of the priests who had been hinted at as being about to swim the Tiber by the RC bishop of Brentwood (Rt Rev Thomas McMahon). Using the good old standby of 'assume makes an ass of u and me" I was told by this 'priest' that I as a 'minister' should be in possession of all the facts before I published them on my 'opinionated blog' (hooray, I have another label for my collection) and that I didn't know the half of it.
Well of course I don't and I can understand that to be pointed out as one who had been in talks or had been assumed to have been one of those embarking on swimming lessons by +Brentwood must have been rather frustrating and perhaps a little too revealing. That said, when speaking of the bishop's revelations, the 'priest' in question did say in a newspaper article that the bishop's announcement was 'premature' which presumes that, like pregnancy, it is a reality that was there before its time! So it was appear that the act is either set, or has been talked about, but the time was not then. Perhaps he hadn't spoken to his bishop (Anglican) about it before the naughty brentwood went off and fired the starting pistol and so was caught perhaps a little infragrente dilecto!
Anyway, from one Priest to another I do wish him well if he does swim and if he decides not to, making +Brentwood's assumptionsg wrong, to enjoy his presence helping us maintain the catholicity of the Church of England and work the Gospel to those around us.
Still, with no assumptions at all I read today of those who had indeed swum and turn my attention to the parish of St John the Baptist, Sevenoaks, who are sending forty members and two clergy off to Rome.
The first person to be quoted is a lady who makes some interesting comments about the general direction the CofE is taking and says "I abhor abortion and euthanasia, I'm pro-life and I think the Anglican church can be very wishy-washy about this.". Many of those engaged in the pro-life ministry are Anglicans and it is a fallacy to assume that the CofE is not generally pro-life so if this was the reason to leave I'd say it was on a wrong assumption. But, (always a but isn't there?) speaking of her church she says, "When I came to St John's I thought, 'This is for me,' says Mrs Vaughan. "I love the solemnity, the ritual, the theatricality - but that was leading me on to be prayerful." I can't fault her for swimming if this is what she's after, she will find lots of that and she's going as a crowd which makes the transition better. I would query the prayerfulness, for it seems that bible knowledge, prayer and other aspects don't feature as high on the agenda of many of the high-church types I know. It's ritual and the theatre that is church that is the key focus (and that come from me who is apparently a bit of a 'closet tat queen'!!).
The parish priest says that the problems with the church are deeper than the issue of women priests and syas that, "Under the bondage of the whims of the General Synod, the Church of England is diluting the Gospel of Christ and espousing the spirit of this passing age." These are thoughts that many, regardless of churchmanship will echo and support.
From passing conversations I think that his views on the ordinariate not being an 'elite' are correct and hope it it not so, but think they will find themselves in a situation that will make them an oddity if not the ghetto many fear.
A third voice says that "Changes he finds unacceptable are gathering pace in the Anglican church. The slippery slope is getting steeper and steeper all the time... I think it's a process which is far too developed now to stop its momentum." Now I would again plead that those who have problems make a stand and use their voices and their knees rather than go.
The man is obviously balanced and as he speaks of those who endorse the changes he cannot, says, "One retains warmth of feeling towards fellow Christians but I can't escape the conclusion that in those respects, they are mistaken. I don't think that's a reason for enmity, though."
But I think he sums up the position for many who have left (or are considering it), especially when there are a few from one congregation: "It's far more comfortable doing this in a group." But he sees what I feel will be the reality for the ordinariate when he says that the time will come when it says, "Maybe we are reaching the end of our useful life and we should just dissolve into the Roman Church."
And again, there is a healthy dose of realism in that, "We go there retaining elements of Anglicanism but... you do risk being a sort of rump group, sustaining itself for the sake of sustaining itself."
So there you have it, some balance and some indication from those who have acted as they feel led and swum. Those of us who are remaining do so with sadness at their leaving (well, for the most part) and pray that they will find that which they seek.
My sadness came when I read the account of the curate who has decided to join the ordinariate and to be celibate. My sadness is not that he is going but that he has chosen not to take up ministry as a full and proper Catholic priest but stay with the ordinariate. If Rome is his true home then why, I wonder, does he choose not to fully embrace it? Obviously many of those considering (or going) are married and so can through the ordinariate have their marital rights and the comfort of a Catholic home, but for those who are unmarried it still seems to me to be an odd move.
The final word goes to one of the parishioners who has chosen to remain Anglican:
On the Ordinariate: "A common response is that this is too soon, because we're half-way through a legislative process, the end of which we do not know."
On women bishops (and inadequate f[provision for those who oppose the move): "All hell will be let loose. Some opponents will join the Roman Catholics direct, not bothering with the Ordinariate!"
Of those who have left: "For them it is the right decision. It should be respected. They should be congratulated on their decision and I wish them all the best in the next stage of their pilgrimage."
Amen to that.
3 comments:
I am sad that those leaving feel so alienated by the Church, but I wonder if perhaps personal pique at not getting their own way (i.e. being left in their comfortable ghetto with all the benefits of being allowed to please themselves) rather then disenchantment with the way they perceive the church to be going?
It is a pity that some could not leave with grace, but have vented their spite on the church and those left behind.
As someone who swam the Tiber the other way (one among many) I wish them well and hope that they feel at home. Because when they say that they are making a leap of faith, I actually think that it is an understatement.
The only proper reason for becoming RC (when you're Anglican)(or Anglican when you're RC), is that your "new" church is something which (as opposed to your "old" church) one which you have become convinced (perhaps over a long time) holds the Truth, and (alone) is authentically Christian. This is/was, eg. the position of such converts as J. H. Newman. Converting due to a single issue (women bishops, gays, etc.,) is, I think, inadequate in itself; and certainly familiarity & traditiuon ("comfort zone") should be right out. I agree, though, that a Church's position on such as women bishops & gays can be indicative of the inner reality of the Church (as it now is, under the present regime).
Dearie me, I thought of this during Sunday Mass as we belted out numbers which wouldn't be out of place in a gospel choir. (A bit of wiggle in time to the music included). Certainly the lady who wanted ritual would scuttle back across the Tiber pretty quick if she encountered my congregation! I hope and pray that those who have joined the ordinariate find what they hope for and that those left behind can find it in their hearts not to feel disappointed and hurt.
Post a Comment